After announcing he is not running against fellow Liberal candidates but “against Stephen Harper and the Conservative government,” [Michael Ignatieff] charged them with dishonesty, incompetence and something close to bigotry and racism.
“We do not want a Canada where the colour of your skin, the language that you speak, the country you originated from determines how well you survive this economic downturn,” Mr. Ignatieff declared. Liberals, he added, “are going to fight for all Canadians to get the same shot at the economic dream.”
[…]
It’s a desperate-seeming strategy, even if certain tired elements within the Liberal party — ageing spin doctors seeking to recapture their glory days of smearing Stockwell Day — haven’t gotten tired of it. Why, one wonders, is Mr. Ignatieff taking tactical cues from the Adscam-era demagogues who gave his party such a bad name in the first place?
Indeed. For his opening move, the demagogue mentions an Ignatieff NYT piece from 2004 – without linking it.
Ignatieff initially supported the [Iraq] war – as had the Clintons, and as had most of the Democratic Party establishment.By March 2004 – long before he became an MP, let alone a Liberal leadership contestant – he was writing in the New York Times that he had been wrong. That impressed me.
And for good reason. Oops! Here’s what Ignatieff actually wrote about his support for bombing Iraq (a country chock full of brown people!);
The discovery that Hussein didn’t have weapons after all surprises me, but it doesn’t change my view of the essential issue. I never thought the key question was what weapons he actually possessed but rather what intentions he had.
Ignatieff concludes the op-ed by arguing (rightly, in my opinion) that having intervened, the US was duty bound to pursue the Iraq war to a successful outcome;
If the United States falters now, civil war is entirely possible. If it falters, it will betray everyone who has died for something better.
Interventions amount to a promise: we promise that we will leave the country better than we found it; we promise that those who died to get there did not die in vain.
It wasn’t until he decided to run for political office – in a country he hadn’t lived in since 1978 – that Ignatieff had a “change of heart”.
But that’s just predictable spin on an issue that died earlier this year when the tides in Iraq turned in George Bush’s favour. It’s this passage, from the second paragraph, that caught my eye;
As usual we were talking about ourselves: what America is and how to use its frightening power in the world.
In 2004, Michael Ignatieff not only continued to support the prosecution of the Iraq war, he publicly self-identified as American to a New York Times audience.
Again, it wasn’t until he decided to run for political office – in a country he hadn’t lived in since 1978 – that he had a “change of heart”.
And he has his shiny new spin-doctor to thank for pointing it out.
How does the Ignatieff brain trust intend to gloss over his sordid past as described in this G & M piece that reveals Ignatieff and all his warts? How are they going to sell Canadians such damaged goods .. wrap him up in the beloved Liberal brand to sanitize his infidelity and abandoning his old wife and children?
……………………………………….
Being Michael Ignatieff
He’s known for his charm, good looks and big ideas. But he also admits to ruthlessness. He has hurt those who loved him most. And after decades abroad, he now wants to become the leader of this country. Michael Valpy peels back the layers to find the man beneath the brilliant surface
Globe and Mail – August 25, 2006
Excerpt from article at: http://tinyurl.com/o9sfr
Shortly afterward, a British newspaper gossip columnist trumpeted that Michael Ignatieff — “the patron saint of the New Man” — had left his wife for another woman.
And during our interview, he says: “I did have a very bad patch in 1993. My marriage broke up. It was the closest thing to a near-death experience, and it was initiated by me. So it’s difficult to talk about — because I don’t want to hurt other people.”
Four years later, the Ignatieffs divorced, and accounts of the marriage’s disintegration are uniform: The separation proceedings were poisonous, the legal bills huge. Michael told friends of having to pay several thousand pounds just to vary his visiting time with Sophie by one hour.
7: FALL FROM GRACE
In 1999, Michael Ignatieff married Suzanna Zsohar in London’s Hackney town hall.
Ron: “Is he willfully ignorant or does he not understand the Liberal Party is all about racism, bigotry and hatred.”
Iggy’s unplugged from reality, period. He grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth, he’s lived most of his adult life in either England or the U.S.A., and now he’s alligned himself with the La-La-Land-Librano$ into which he was parachuted from ivory towered academia. “Willfully ignorant” might describe his current state.
Certainly, out to lunch would describe where he’s at though, sadly, that doesn’t mean that Canadians wouldn’t vote for him.
What I really can’t stand is his aw-shucks smile which still manages to come across as arrogant condescension.
The guy’s a phony, plain and simple.
One other irony: The Librano$ insist that they’re a people’s party, that they care about the little guy and accuse the Conservatives of being the party of big business.
So, how come two of the front runners for the Librano leadership are “Rosedale/Forest Hill socialists,” both of whom grew up in very privileged, wealthy circumstances and how come they’ve got one of the biggest businesses in Canada, Power Corp, pulling their strings?
They’ve got a lot of ‘splaining to do.
Gotta love the omments from the trolls. Critisize and castigate Harper and then laurels and praise for the two losers of the last Liberal convention. Rae hasn’t got a hope with his baggage from his “Rae” days in Ontario unless the Ontario electorate are brain dead, oh..wait, they voted for him so…maybe..na, couldn’t be that stupid twice in twelve months, could they? Iggy on the otherhand doesn’t have much baggage, doesn’t have much history, doesn’t show much intelligence, (the ‘Puffin’ man) and now he’s got the backing of a high school sophomore and his fuzzy friends, yeah, I’d say its time to cue the sound clip for the upcoming Liberal convention. Ladies and Gentlemen, that chanteuse that our own P.E.T. held so dear, Miss Barbara Streisland singing,…. Send in the Clowns”
If Iggy bthe Liberal leader he, like Dion, will be the best friend the Conservatives ever had (except for Dion). Don’t knock him! He will be a great leader.
I am not overly concerned about Iggy. Unlike Lawrence Martin, I don’t see that he has much charisma. He just always strikes me as one of these elitist professor types (and I have heard he is.) One may listen to their ideas, but there is not a lot of personal appeal.
Note to Conservative Supporter: Yes, Iggy is not Stephane Dion, but I do not believe the next election will be a cake-walk for Iggy. These things are always complex. By virtue of winning more seats in this election, the Conservatives are stronger — and memories of the “natural governing party” are fading . Also, the landscape has changed and the economy is now a central issue. How Harper handles the economy will probably be the most significant factor in the next election. (Or at least that’s what it looks like now — who knows what will crop up in the interim.)
If Iggy bthe Liberal leader he, like Dion, will be the best friend the Conservatives ever had (except for Dion). Don’t knock him! He will be a great leader.
“Certain parts of me are utterly unchanged, I’m a kind of Pierre Trudeau, gay marriage, tax and spend liberal on the social domestic side, pretty well unchanged since the sixties…I’m a blue-state tax and spend liberal as I’ve said” – Michael Ignatieff.
http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/ignatieff.html
Okay, I take the man at his word, he is a tax and spend liberal. And who better than to advance his high tax agenda than our lobbyist friend Kinsella, who helped McGuinty hike taxes and destroy the Ontario economy?
Ignatieff will be so much fun to characterize in an election: Socialist, Academic, Elitist, American, Out of country for 30 years, Supporter of Iraq war, etc., etc., What a delight! Even better than Dion.
Ignatieff will be so much fun to characterize in an election: Socialist, Academic, Elitist, American, Out of country for 30 years, Supporter of Iraq war, etc., etc., What a delight! Even better than Dion.
Ignatieff will be so much fun to characterize in an election: Socialist, Academic, Elitist, American, Out of country for 30 years, Supporter of Iraq war, etc., etc., What a delight! Even better than Dion.
1) The MSM will fall in love him, he is one of their own, both as a former journalist and like thme, highly educated, cosmopolitan etc etc…he may in fact be what they all wish they could be
2) His racist line is straight from Warren. We will see how far that goes. It is the Liberals trying to protect “the fourth sister” as being theirs. So was the I love my country.
Typical Warren lines against conservatoves, you defend people with ugly opinions and you dont really like Canada because you keep crticising it.
I would rather know what these guys are for. I still think Rae will win, and I think Rae is likely their best choice, of the choices they have. Rae has run a party, knows what it means to run a party. Maybe thats the attraction of Iggy to Warren and his crew…Iggy wants nothing to do with that…a faustian deal, “get me in power so I can run the government, and you get to run the party and all that greasey mechanical stuff that I dont want to get involved in. ”
So Iggy is reframing himself as a Black Russian now and not the scion of White Russian emigres? Gee. Another white multimillionaire who feels the pain of coloured people. I’m moved. No, really.
8=^(
Antenor; You have forced me to dredge up this Political mating call for liberals. Love birds in a collective.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnwJ5KIcKX4&feature=related
Not long ago Ignatieff wrote an article advocating a militarily imposed solution to the Israel Palestine conflict. In short, he wants the UN to invade and occupy part of Israel. Here is the article:
Why Bush must send in his troops
Imposing a two-state solution is the last chance for Middle East peace
Michael Ignatieff
Friday April 19, 2002
guardian.co.uk
…
“The time for endless negotiation between the parties is past: it is time to say that all but those settlements right on the 1967 green line must go; that the right of return is incompatible with peace and security in the region and the right must be extinguished with a cash settlement; that the UN, with funding from Europe, will establish a transitional administration to help the Palestinian state back on its feet and then prepare the ground for new elections before exiting; and, most of all, the US must then commit its own troops, and those of willing allies, not to police a ceasefire, but to enforce the solution that provides security for both populations.
Imposing a peace of this amplitude on both parties, and committing the troops to back it up, would be the most dramatic exercise of presidential leadership since the Cuban missile crisis. Nothing less dramatic than this will prevent the Middle East from descending into an inferno.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4397277-103552,00.html
What say you, neo-cons? And how is Kinsella going to explain to his colleagues at the CJC that he is backing a Harvard prof who advocates invading and occupying Israel?
I don’t care who wins the lieberal leadership race, just as long as the COST of the race is very very big:-))))
STOPIGGY speaking in tongues:
“I’m a kind of Pierre Trudeau, gay marriage, tax and spend liberal””.
More from the Prof:
“That is I’m not an apologist for Bush, I’m a blue-state tax and spend liberal as I’ve said – never support him domestically, and I wouldn’t support him internationally because this was a regime which was incompetent, untruthful…
Solomon: But nonetheless you’re aligned with the fundamental positions on the foreign policy level.
Ignatieff: Yes, because I believe very strongly that there was not a solution to the Iraqi crises of 2002/2003 short of the application of military force.
Solomon: And this is what conservatives have always said to liberals, you know, wake up – they always say a liberal that goes to war always comes back a conservative.
Ignatieff: No, I’m not a conservative across the board.
Solomon: No not across the board.
Ignatieff: On the moral issues, on the social issues, on the international issues I’m also not a conservative in that I don’t join in them in scorn of multilateral institutions, in scorn of the UN, contempt for the weapons inspectors, in scorn for international human-rights conventions. I’m not on that side at all. What I do think…
Solomon: You’re starting to sound lonely though, you don’t have any allies.”
…-
“MICHAEL IGNATIEFF INTERVIEW”
http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/ignatieff.html
The only chance the Grits had to present real, electable alternative to Conservatives has effectively ended:
– bring in high profile, centrist leader like Manley or McKenna, who have since begged off; or
– bite the bullet, accept their corrupt political culture is unelectable, and bring in new, young leader to rebuild the party from the ground up.
Instead, assuming they don’t elect Leblanc, they have opted for two old white men with many, many skeletons in their closet. Then they accuse others of racism – mighty “rich” hypocisy.
Harper and CPC will have field day with either Ignatieff or Rae, IMO.
OOOps … Duplication of Ontario Conservative’s post above is purely coincidental.
It’s Iggy’s fault.
Here is another interview where Iggy says: “I said I’m going home to do my laundry.”
http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/ignatieffinvu.html
Iggy’s got a lot of laundry to do …
With the not inconsiderable capabilities of Mr K a lot of laundry will be done.
However, the question is will Rae be forced from the race….Iggy is playing for keeps so Bob either has to get serious and nasty or he will be eaten alive.
The question is how nasty will the Igster get to push Bob out.
Secondly, channel will be changed. Igs has no domestic credentials….Libs have to make this about some broader vision that allows Iggy to free skate. WK finds his hobby horse in the HRC’s to say Conservatives are big ugly and mean.
Of course Ig, who likely hasnt looked at the issue at all, has to defend breaking essential rules of law and due process. I suspect that Iggy wouldnt countenance that either, if he were giving an honest answer.
A faustian bargain has been struck, Warren swallows hard or ignores positions on Iraq, Torture and the Quebec Nation resolution and gets to be allowed back into the playpen.
How hard Rae and Iggy will fight it out is yet to be seen. Given that Rae was most likely backed by the Chretienite side last time…we will see. Rae got pissed off and announced his entry early because he was angry at the tactics “the other side” was using.
We will see if Bob Rae really has the fire in his belly or not.
Le Blanc for leader! then we can kiss the Libs goodbye.
Well, that settles it. Up until now, I’ve considered Ignatieff to be the only Liberal Party leadership hopeful that I could possibly vote for. That idea just died. He’s no different that the legions of big brass American Democrats who were for the war before they were against it, who prefer to pretend they didn’t vote in Congress for the Iraq Liberation Act and whose President, Clinton, passed the Act into law, making the removal of Saddam Hussein official US policy during a period of time when the Democrats dominated the American government.
ET wrote: “You don’t seem to understand the difference between ideology and pragmatics.”
Lefties never do, do they. I wonder why that is. Might have something to do with the willing submission to brainwashing, sheep-like behaviour and an inability to recognize and deal with inconvenient truths.
It really is amazing to see them slag religion when their own beliefs are just as “religious”. They choose to worship government rather than have faith in their fellow man.
This is a classic example of what happens to essentially good people that get only a whim of the taste of power.
The subject of this post was for all practical purposes an American. Had a view that in big scheme of things made sense and spelled it out.
Then one day somebody called him up, said, how would you, like to be the prime minister of Canada.
Wow, sound awesome, just like that. People will vote for you, they really don’t care, if it sounds good, that is all that matters.
Let’s just change the stories told, to suit the purpose.
And here we are.
A guy that went to school a long time and when he was finished he stayed around. Why not, it pays handsome coin, you get to go to all the right parties, get to meet all the right people and you get to tell other people what is right and what is wrong, if they don’t agree you send them packing. They have no chance in hell to tell you that you are full of hot air. Being an aristocrat among all these plebes must feel like living in something akin to a toilet.
You write a few books that fewer people will read, though it sounds awesome on a resume, it shows that you have spunk.
Then of course you are finished with impressing those around you, the response is just not the same or perhaps, being sophist, you identify for the ego boosters it is mostly sophistry in the guise of appreciation and find it lacking.
Hey, the old country is up for grabs. Here is your chance to be in the position of being appreciated even if somewhat peripherally.
You know how to turn a phrase to impress the masses. The masses are waiting for someone to turn them on, why not you, after all you went to school for a long time.
This book
‘http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,899743,00.html?iid=chix-sphere’
is not necessarily indicative of Ignatieff, though it shows how the power in the hands of some, corrupts the character not only of the power, it corrupts its victims.
At present it seems more as a script for south of the border, however that remains to be seen.
The Canadian political scene is ripe for a dictator. The nurses, the teachers, the unionists, the entitled, they tell a sorry story to anyone (“journalist”) that will spread it to the masses. Unfortunately we are going to get one.
Harper is just an interlude. It is indicative that he did not get a majority. Most Canadians refuse to take care of their own business, they want the government to do it for them.
This is not a matter of left or right, it is a matter of taking care of one’s own life and after that helps others.
Facts of life are conservative. Though, apparently, who wants facts of life?
I think Libs have essentially the same problem they had last time — two strong candidates with roughly equal support. I don’t think supporters for either of them are keen to see the other one win. This is a divided party. Perhaps Mr. Leblanc is the answer.
Ah yes the liberal leadership race.
What will it be this time?
Another train wreak in slow motion or a parade of clown school graduates?
If Kinsella asks Ignatieff to join his geezer punk rock band “Shit From Hell” he’ll have to rename it to”Shit For Brains”.